迈向新型活动监测设备的发展。

Movement toward a novel activity monitoring device.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506-6040, USA.

出版信息

Sleep Breath. 2012 Sep;16(3):913-7. doi: 10.1007/s11325-011-0585-y. Epub 2011 Oct 6.

DOI:10.1007/s11325-011-0585-y

PMID:21971963

Abstract

PURPOSE

Although polysomnography is necessary for diagnosis of most sleep disorders, it is also expensive, time-consuming, intrusive, and interferes with sleep. Field-based activity monitoring is increasingly used as an alternative measure that can be used to answer certain clinical and research questions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of a novel activity monitoring device (Fitbit) compared to both polysomnography and standard actigraphy (Actiwatch-64).

METHODS

To test validity, simultaneous Fitbit and actigraph were worn during standard overnight polysomnography by 24 healthy adults at the West Virginia University sleep research laboratory. To test inter-Fitbit reliability, three participants also wore two of the Fitbit devices overnight at home.

RESULTS

Fitbit showed high intradevice reliability = 96.5-99.1. Fitbit and actigraph differed significantly on recorded total sleep time and sleep efficiency between each other and polysomnography. Bland-Altman plots indicated that both Fitbit and actigraph overestimated sleep efficiency and total sleep time. Sensitivity of both Fitbit and actigraphy for accurately identifying sleep was high within all sleep stages and during arousals; specificity of both Fitbit and actigraph for accurately identifying wake was poor. Specificity of actigraph was higher except for wake before sleep onset; sensitivity of Fitbit was higher in all sleep stages and during arousals.

CONCLUSIONS

The web-based Fitbit, available at a markedly reduced price and with several convenience factors compared to standard actigraphy, may be an acceptable activity measurement instrument for use with normative populations. However, Fitbit has the same specificity limitations as actigraphy; both devices consistently misidentify wake as sleep and thus overestimate both sleep time and quality. Use of the Fitbit will also require specific validation before it can be used to assess disordered populations and or different age groups.

摘要

目的

尽管多导睡眠图对于大多数睡眠障碍的诊断都是必要的，但它也昂贵、耗时、有侵入性，并会干扰睡眠。基于现场的活动监测越来越多地被用作替代措施，可以用来回答某些临床和研究问题。本研究的目的是评估一种新型活动监测设备（Fitbit）与多导睡眠图和标准活动计（Actiwatch-64）相比的可靠性和有效性。

方法

为了测试有效性，24 名健康成年人在西弗吉尼亚大学睡眠研究实验室同时佩戴 Fitbit 和活动计进行标准夜间多导睡眠图检查。为了测试 Fitbit 之间的内部可靠性，三名参与者还在家中佩戴了两个 Fitbit 设备过夜。

结果

Fitbit 显示出高度的内部设备可靠性=96.5-99.1。Fitbit 和活动计在记录的总睡眠时间和睡眠效率方面彼此之间以及与多导睡眠图之间存在显著差异。Bland-Altman 图表明，Fitbit 和活动计都高估了睡眠效率和总睡眠时间。在所有睡眠阶段和觉醒期间，Fitbit 和活动计准确识别睡眠的敏感性都很高；在所有睡眠阶段和觉醒期间，Fitbit 和活动计准确识别清醒的特异性都很差。除了睡眠开始前的清醒外，活动计的特异性更高；在所有睡眠阶段和觉醒期间，Fitbit 的敏感性更高。

结论

与标准活动计相比，基于网络的 Fitbit 价格明显降低，并且具有几个便利因素，可能是一种可接受的活动测量仪器，可用于正常人群。然而，Fitbit 与活动计具有相同的特异性限制；这两种设备都一致地将清醒错误地识别为睡眠，从而高估了睡眠时间和质量。在将 Fitbit 用于评估紊乱人群和/或不同年龄组之前，还需要进行特定的验证。